IJISA Vol. 4, No. 9, 8 Aug. 2012
Cover page and Table of Contents: PDF (size: 504KB)
Full Text (PDF, 504KB), PP.92-103
Views: 0 Downloads: 0
Geospatial, Meta-Data, Confidence Interval, Socioeconomic, Data Mapping
It is quite common to have access to geospatial (temporal/spatial) panel data generated by a set of similar data for analyses in a meta-data setup. Within this context, researchers often employ pooling methods to evaluate the efficacy of meta-data analysis. One of the simplest techniques used to combine individual-study results is the fixed-effects model, which assumes that a true-effect is equal for all studies. An alternative, and intuitively-more-appealing method, is the random-effects model. A paper was presented by the first author, and his co-authors addressing the efficient estimation problem, using this method in the aforesaid meta-data setup of the ‘Geospatial Data’ at hand, in Map World Forum meeting in 2007 at Hyderabad; INDIA. The purpose of this paper had been to address the estimation problem of the fixed-effects model and to present a simulation study of an efficient confidence-interval estimation of a mean true-effect using the panel-data and a random-effects model, too in order to establish appropriate ‘confidence interval’ estimation for being readily usable in a decision-makers’ setup. The present paper continues the same perspective, and proposes a much more efficient estimation strategy furthering the gainful use of the ‘Geospatial Panel-Data’ in the Global/Continental/ Regional/National contexts of “Socioeconomic & other Developmental Issues’. The ‘Statistical Efficient Confidence Interval Estimation Theme’ of the paper(s) has a wider ambit than its applicability in the context of ‘Socioeconomic Development’ only. This ‘Statistical Theme’ is, as such, equally gainfully applicable to any area of application in the present world-order at large inasmuch as the “Data-Mapping” in any context, for example, the issues in the topically significant area of “Global Environmental Pollution-Mitigation for Arresting the Critical phenomenon of Global Warming”. Such similar issues are tackle-able more readily, as the impactful advances in the “GIS & GPS” technologies have led to the concept of “Managing Global Village” in terms of ‘Geospatial Meta-Data’. This last fact has been seminal to special zeal-n-motivation to the authors to have worked for this improved paper containing rather a much more efficient strategy of confidence-interval estimation for decision-making team of managers for any impugned area of application.
Ashok Sahai, Clement K. Sankat, Koffka Khan, "Decision-Making Using Efficient Confidence-Intervals with Meta-Analysis of Spatial Panel Data for Socioeconomic Development Project-Managers", International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications(IJISA), vol.4, no.9, pp.92-103, 2012. DOI:10.5815/ijisa.2012.09.12
[1]Armitage P. Controversies and achievements in clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 1984; 5: 67-72.
[2]DerSimonian R, Laird N. Evaluating the effect of coaching on SAT Scores: a meta-analysis. Havard Ed Rev 1983; 53: 1-15.
[3]Brockwell, S E, and Gordon, I. R. A comparison of statistical methods for meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2001; 20: 825-840.
[4]DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 1986; 7: 177-188.
[5]Halvorsen, K: Combining results from independent investigations: meta-analysis in medical research. In: Medical Uses of Statistics, Bailar, J C, Mosteteller, F; Eds. Boston: New England Journal of Medicine (in press).
[6]Hardy, R J, Thompson, S. G. A likelihood approach to meta-analysis with random effects. Statistics in Medicine 1996; 15: 619-629.
[7]Olkin, I. Invited Commentary: Re: A critical look at some popular meta-analytic methods. American Journal of Epidemiology 1994; 140: 297-299.
[8]Sahai, Ashok & Bhoendradatt Tewarie. Meta-Analysis of Spatial Panel Data for Socioeconomic Development Project(s) in India. Map World Forum (Jan. 2007 @ Hyderabad, ICC; INDIA).
[9]Sidik, K, and Jonkman, J. N. A simple confidence interval for meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2002; 21: 3153-3159.
[10]Villar, J, Maria E. Mackey, Guillermo, C. and Allan, D. Meta-analyses in systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials in perinatal medicine: comparison of fixed and random effect models. Statistics in Medicine 2001; 20: 3635-3647.